Hi Zhang,
In a 2 copy pool, each placement group is spread across 2 OSDs - that is why you see such a high number of placement groups per OSD. There is a PG calculator at http://ceph.com/pgcalc/. Based on your setup, it may be worth using 2048 instead of 4096.
As for stuck/degraded PGs, most are reporting as being on osd.0. Looking at your OSD Tree, you somehow have 21 OSDs being reported with 2 being labeled as osd.0; both up and in. I'd recommend trying to get rid of the one listed on host 148_96 and see if it clears the issues.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Zhang Qiang <dotslash.lu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Reddy,It's over a thousand lines, I pasted it on gist: https://gist.github.com/dotSlashLu/22623b4cefa06a46e0d4On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 at 18:15 M Ranga Swami Reddy <swamireddy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi,
Can you please share the "ceph health detail" output?
Thanks
Swami
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Zhang Qiang <dotslash.lu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have 20 OSDs and 1 pool, and, as recommended by the
> doc(http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/placement-groups/), I
> configured pg_num and pgp_num to 4096, size 2, min size 1.
>
> But ceph -s shows:
>
> HEALTH_WARN
> 534 pgs degraded
> 551 pgs stuck unclean
> 534 pgs undersized
> too many PGs per OSD (382 > max 300)
>
> Why the recommended value, 4096, for 10 ~ 50 OSDs doesn't work? And what
> does it mean by "too many PGs per OSD (382 > max 300)"? If per OSD has 382
> PGs I would have had 7640 PGs.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
